The price of liberty really is eternal vigilance, and that applies to Congress too.

When you go vote this year I'll ask you to take note of the abbreviations you see next to most names on the ballot. For example, next to my name, Calen Fretts, you will see "LBT" - that represents "Liberty." And next to my opponent's name, Jeff Miller, you ought to see a "5T" - for the $5,000,000,000,000+ (over five trillion dollars) in debt he has put his stamp of approval on over his last 11 years in office. This is despite Jeff Miller's repeated, contradictory statements over the years that he is actually against more debt. If so, stop voting for it.

If there's one thing I know, it's that trillions of dollars in debt is not "conservative," despite the Congressman's claims. And it certainly isn't what our nation needs anymore.

But if it wasn't a "5T" then maybe it would be an "NDAA." That's the National Defense Authorization Act, which gave President Obama illegal powers to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial. Perhaps it could be "TSA" - the Transportation Security Administration and its naked-body radiation scanners and invasive body searches by federal agents as a condition of travel.

One possibility could be "FDA." Our Congressman voted to absolve medical corporations of lawsuits from people like you and I, no matter how harmful their products, simply because they got approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Or it might even be a "UN," for the billions of your taxpayer dollars Jeff Miller recently voted to use to continue funding the United Nations and international ‘peacekeeping’ operations.

How much more infringement on your wealth and your liberties will Congressman Miller vote for in the future?

In one of our recent debates, Jeff Miller actually said it is not his job to ensure that laws he writes and votes for are Constitutional. He said that was the job of the Courts. Watch the debate for yourself. This attitude led us to the big problems we have today. We need people in Congress who believe in the Constitution and won't bribe you with your own tax money.

The choice is simple: You can vote for the 5T, the NDAA, the TSA, the FDA, and the UN. Or, you can opt for Liberty. You know where I stand.

See you at the polls!

]]>info@FrettsForCongress.com (Administrator)The Fretts PerspectiveSun, 04 Nov 2012 22:24:46 +0000Free Speech Zoneshttp://elect.calenfretts.com/intel/perspective/93-free-speech-zones
http://elect.calenfretts.com/intel/perspective/93-free-speech-zonesFrom the late 18th century until relatively recently, there was only one "free speech zone" that U.S. citizens had to worry about - it was called "the United States." The whole concept of a "free speech zone" is, on its face, a preposterous self-contradiction. If one must be within dictated confines to express a "freedom," then one is not truly free. While the idea has been around in the U.S. for a few decades now in limited forms, it has been greatly expanded just since the turn of the millennium. Now, the prevailing standard is that, in order to speak your mind or protest in public, taxpayer-funded areas, from universities to sidewalks, you must request permission from the government and restrict yourself to the areas they decide upon. This runs perpendicular to the freedom our nation was founded upon.

Take for example the "protest zones" at this year's Republican National Convention in Tampa. There were a couple such zones where, if you had something important to convey, you were granted the opportunity to do so; but only at the specified times, mind you. The rest of the city of Tampa was "off limits" to free speech. This means that citizens of Tampa who may have no problem expressing their freedom of speech on an average day were arbitrarily barred from doing so for this particular week. Of course, freedom of speech means nothing when nobody can see or hear you. Governments and public institutions have a tendency to relegate these "protest zones" to areas where they are "out of sight, out of mind."

You may have heard of H.R. 347, the "Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011." What this bill does is criminalize the First Amendment if you are in an area where individuals under Secret Service protection are temporarily located, even if you don't know you're committing a crime. Of course, who tend to require Secret Service protection? Politicians! So your politicians in U.S. Congress passed a bill making it illegal for you to express your freedom of speech or protest in the same area as them if they are under Secret Service protection. H.R. 347 passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a "bipartisan" vote of 399-3, including your own U.S. Representative Jeff Miller. This ought to infuriate you.

Now I'm going to say something which may shock you. The U.S. Constitution does notguarantee freedom of speech. Why would I say that? Because a document, even one as visionary and revolutionary as the U.S. Constitution, cannot guarantee anything. The Constitution merely recognizes your natural right – as a free human being – to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom to own and bear firearms; freedom to exercise dominion over your body and your property, so long as you harm no one else. These rights are yours from the time you are born until the time you die. They are not given and cannot be taken away – that is, they are unalienable - but they can be infringed upon by others – most usually governments. The Constitution recognizes these rights, but it is you who must guarantee them.

So, how do you secure these rights? You start by drawing a line in the sand. You must decide for yourself at what point you will cease complying with illegal, un-Constitutional, and immoral infringements on your natural rights, whatever the cost. You must exercise these rights, and familiarize yourself with them and their nature, and educate your family and others so they are not forgotten by future generations. And of course, you must refuse to re-elect politicians who repeatedly insist on violating your natural rights, as the majority of those now in Congress – including your own U.S. Representative – have done.

One of the essential keys to a booming economy is the success of small business. It is small businesses that create approximately two-thirds of the nation's net new jobs. As an entrepreneur of many years in the web development field, I understand the struggles small businesses go though. Most of these struggles could be mitigated or outright eliminated by simply getting government out of the way.

Government does not create jobs; in fact, whenever it interferes in the free market beyond its fundamental role of prosecuting force and fraud, it has the opposite effect of destroying jobs. Yet both Democrat and Republican politicians, such as our district's Congressman Jeff Miller, talk constantly about "creating jobs." They intend to do this through various forms of market interference such as granting special favors to some businesses or industries or special interest groups, or making business and hiring practices "fair," or some other supposedly well-intentioned and benevolent means. What these politicians do not understand is that capitalism free of such government "solutions" is in fact the only way to solve the problem.

Permits, licensing, and "fees" (in the form of taxes) are a favorite form of government protectionism. It is in fact large corporations who often lobby for these requirements, as it is they who can afford to comply while keeping the "little guy" out. But in a free market, there is a much better regulator: the consumer. When consumers are free to vote for the best product with their dollar, everybody wins - except those who profited from big-government protectionism. One method of getting outdated, bad laws such as these off the books would be to introduce a federal sunset provision, where all federal legislation expires after a period of 10 or 20 years.

Of course, the most hated time of year in the small business world is April. Business income is taxed, personal income is taxed, compounded on top of property taxes, sales taxes throughout the year, and more; not to mention the tax on your time, filling out paperwork to submit to the IRS. The proportion of your wealth that the government takes from you throughout the year is colossal; many estimates put the total well over 50%. Indeed, many politicians love passing temporary tax cuts, as this is always sure to keep the lobbyists coming back with more and more cash. But all of these taxes should be permanently repealed and replaced with one simple, Constitutional excise tax: the FairTax. Though this would put thousands of IRS agents out of a job, it would allow businesses to create new and useful jobs many times over.

Republican politicians do a lot of talking about lowering taxes, eliminating burdensome regulations, and decreasing government, but it never seems to happen. When it comes to really being sincere about getting government out of all facets of your life, there is no greater friend than a Libertarian.

Government is incompetent. That's a phrase everyone has heard, and most tend to agree with. But at one thing politicians have proven adept: getting reelected.

It is not just politicians who know how to stay in power, it is the whole political system. The two major parties have perfected the art of "good cop, bad cop;" when one party introduces a new, harmful, and possibly radical policy into the discussion, the other party is always there to put forth their own slightly less (or more) radical versions of the same harmful policies. The end result is a constant trend away from the Constitution and the rule of law, and toward statism and the rule of men. The only real difference is how hard the gas pedal is being pushed at any given time. With about one-third of one billion Americans, it is really possible that everyone thinks in only two political parties?

The question is, how are politicians able to stay in power so often when their perpetual incompetency is so widely understood? By bribing you with your own money. By tricking voters into believing that this time things will change. By convincing voters to vote for the "lesser of two evils" instead of the actual best candidate for the job. By selling the fiction that the only way to fix issues is "from within" rather than "taking your business elsewhere" to a party that truly represents your interests. This has been the trajectory of the United States over the past century, and just look at the rapidly declining state of economy, freedom, and the rule of law in our once great country.

When politicians violate their oath of office to uphold the Constitution, or their pledges to their constituents, they must be ejected from office at the ballot box. Otherwise they (and we) become more complacent with failure, and the state of the nation will continue to deteriorate. Libertarians want competition in all aspects of government. The Republicans and Democrats are about preventing competition through the law. This hurts us as a nation. The two-party system is chock-full of status quo politicians who have created the majority of the national problems they now claim to be able to solve. They could not see the current calamity coming and have no idea what to do now that it is here. Vote Libertarian!

In a newsletter on August 5, 2012, Our Congressman referred to issues surrounding supposed automatic budget cuts which will take effect at the beginning of next year. Interestingly enough, he discussed the "national debt of more than $16 trillion," of which he voted for almost 1/3, and the "deficit exceeding $1 trillion for the fourth consecutive year," which he repeatedly helped create. The best national defense starts with sustainable fiscal and economic strength, and when it comes to borrowing and spending (which weakens the U.S.), Jeff Miller has made his bed with the rest of the big-government statists in Washington, while telling you he is against them.

For example: the Navy has requested funding for nine DDG-51 Destroyers, but Congress appropriated funds for 10 of them. The Quigley of Illinois Amendment would have defunded the extra appropriations and saved almost $1 billion, but Congressman Miller voted against it. As fiscal conservative Congressman Justin Amash stated, "Congress should stop forcing equipment on the Armed Forces that they haven't requested and say they don't need."

Our own Congressman seems to have a penchant for directing our Armed Forces against their will. If he can't even come to cut a relatively minor $1 billion on something the Navy doesn't even want, how can we expect fiscal sanity elsewhere? Something's got to give.

Our Congressman also talks about the "failure of last fall’s “super-committee” to find the required savings without raising job-crushing taxes," but Congressman Miller himself joins in this utter failure as he voted for it! Not to mention, as I noted in a recent article, Congressman Miller voted to sell you out to Big Pharma in the same piece of legislation he now boasts.

In a newsletter on July 29, 2012, Jeff Miller decried the tax increases Congress is considering imposing on us at the end of the year. While it is obvious that tax increases are a bad idea, it should be even more apparent by now that Jeff Miller is, once again, playing with smoke and mirrors. Where does one even begin?

Perhaps with the shell game of extending tax "cuts" for 1 or 2 years at a time. This creates an unstable economic environment where businesses are hesitant to invest, knowing that in just a few years their tax rates may skyrocket again. Of course, this scares jobs overseas, too. But it also gives politicians the ability to scare corporations into cutting big checks for politicians every two years, while begging for those temporary tax cuts to be extended once again.

Perhaps instead with Congressman Miller's flip-flopping on the payroll tax. At first, he voted for the payroll tax cuts. Later, he voted against them, even going so far as to say that it "betrays the taxpayers who have demanded a return to fiscal sanity in the federal government." And now, he has come out in favor of the payroll tax cuts again, which would put Social Security into an even deeper hole. You can't have it both ways, Congressman.

Or perhaps most important is the fact that the hidden tax of the more than $5,000,000,000,000 (5 trillion dollars) in new debt that Jeff Miller racked up on our backs over the past decade is far worse than any tax Congress could even dream of considering this year!

Our government should ditch this immoral tax system altogether (along with the IRS), quit spending and borrowing trillions of dollars it doesn't have and can't afford, and cease impeding the ability of Americans to save and spend the product of their own labor, as only they know best.

Meanwhile, Our Congressman may just as well come out and endorse all those taxes he claims to oppose. It would be no worse than the other fiscal calamities he's voted for time and again, at your expense... and at least it would be honest.

In a newsletter on July 19, 2012, Jeff Miller criticized the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” better known as "Obamacare," as being "anything but affordable." Our Congressman talks a good game, but don't be fooled; his anti-Obamacare rhetoric has nothing to do with ideological opposition in forcing individuals to comply with government demands. The Congressman's actions over the past 10 years have repeatedly shown that he is perfectly content to compel citizens to act as he thinks best, as long as he is making the rules.

One would be hard-pressed to find instances where Our Congressman has vocally and aggressively advocated policies for significantly reducing government intervention and monopolization of the healthcare industry. This could be done in a myriad of ways. Allow purchases across state and even international lines. Get DC bureaucrats out of programs like Medicare and Medicaid and let the States handle these issues. Repeal EMTALA and allow hospitals to deal on an individual basis with those who can't pay for services rendered, instead of forcing all citizens to pay indirectly through exponentially rising annual rates. EMTALA requires hospitals to treat illegal aliens who can't pay, too.

Instead, Our Congressman votes to immunize Big Pharma from punitive damages for any wrongful harm caused by their FDA-approved products, up to and including death. Who is served by this?

Even when it comes to the new regulations, Our Congressman reiterates his intent to "repeal and replace Obamacare." Replace it with what, you might ask? The answer is, whatever version of government healthcare Jeff Miller wants. And the version of government healthcare that Jeff Miller has signed on to includes the Pre-Existing Conditions mandate, by the way. Yes, the same Pre-Existing Conditions mandate that President Obama himself admitted was akin to forcing car insurance companies to provide coverage on vehicles after they are already crashed.

The obvious truth is that government intervention itself, over many decades, has put the whole U.S. healthcare system on a collision course. And it will all come crashing down all-too-soon if Presidents and Congressmen do not cease and desist their meddling in industries they do not understand and have no authority over, and instead let individuals solve such matters voluntarily in the free market.

If Jeff Miller wants to make a point about fixing healthcare, maybe he should start by following his own advice. Obamacare and MillerCare are not so different, after all.

On May 10, 2012, Our Congressman voted for H.R.5652, Sequester Replacement Act of 2012 (House Roll Call #247). Tucked inside this bill were provisions to, believe it or not, absolve medical product manufacturers and distributors of any punitive damages for any wrongful harm if the product was approved by the FDA. The text is found in a section entitled "No Punitive Damages for Products That Comply With FDA Standards." It appears the Congressman does in fact, despite his rhetoric, have great faith in the ability of the federal government to control the healthcare industry.

Look no further than this week's national headlines, where yet another multi-billion dollar medical corporation conceded a multi-billion dollar criminal and civil settlement for harm (up to and including death) caused over many years by its (FDA-approved) asthma treatment. Expect this sort of trend to accelerate now that Big Pharma is on the fast track to ill-gotten fortune; that is, as soon as they realize that they need only get one foot in the (revolving) door at the FDA, and their product instantly becomes liability free.

To state this one more time, in most plain terms: when medical corporations create harmful products and get them approved by the FDA - even if that product kills you or a loved one, and even if they are completely at fault - they can no longer be sued for punitive damages.

In short, Our Congressman is an unapologetic enabler of malfeasance; and it is time to rid the Congress of malfeasance. Politicians often speak in the manner they believe their constituents wish to hear - for example, being critical of big government - but pay attention to the hands.

In a June 13th letter to the Northwest Florida Daily News entitled "Eglin, BRAC, and an Air Force acting recklessly," Representative Jeff Miller says he inserted his own legislative language in HR 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 to "explicitly require the Air Force to keep the Air Armament Center at Eglin" over the wishes of USAF staff and planners.

Playing politics with defense is a bad idea. Do we really want each of our 535 Congresspersons across the U.S. asserting his or her undue influence and power, and violating the autonomy of our military to direct its assets as it knows best? It is the military, not lone Congressmen like Mr. Miller, who are the professionals in this field. They best understand how to get the most out of every defense dollar. Micromanaging will only serve to make the Air Force more costly and less effective when already 43 cents out of every dollar spent by Congress is borrowed. It is unfortunate that asserting undue influence and power like this is the only behavior most members of Congress seems to understand.

Eglin AFB is unique, and its capabilities as a range, operational base, and test and research center will never be matched elsewhere. It has the potential to expand missions and adapt like few military installations on Earth. Units and missions can and should change with defense needs, and not be hamstrung by local politicians. If the USAF were allowed to do its job and relocated units as necessary to sustain defense, who is to say Eglin would not see an increase in personnel and influence in the future instead of clinging to a headquarters unit? What senior military commander would want to relocate to Eglin with a local Congressman so willing to interfere in the planning process?

Mr. Miller should get his priorities right. Instead of worrying about the placement of one- and two-star generals, perhaps he should be more concerned with making sure the military mission is accomplished most efficiently. While we are at it, the citizens of the Panhandle would be better served by a Congressman who, instead of focusing solely on passing a defense budget, refused to violate every American citizen's right to due process as recognized in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution, which is what he did when he voted for the 2012 and 2013 National Defense Authorization Acts. These bills gave President Obama illegal powers to detain U.S. citizens, without charges and without legal counsel, under the guise of funding the military. I can only suppose our Congressman considered the loss of our fundamental liberties less important than passing a defense budget.

I've heard some military men say "Don't worry about the ants if the elephants are about to stomp on you." Jeff Miller is micromanaging ants when elephants like debt and Constitutional neglect are about to stomp on him - and all of us.

If you're anything like me, you might have had a visceral, stomach-churning reaction this past week when the Supreme Court upheld the notion that you can be taxed not just for buying something, but simply as a matter of existence. It has now become direly apparent that all three branches of the federal government are anathema to the Constitution and the soul of America.

[As an interesting side note, the Supreme Court did not originally have the power of judicial review; in fact, it actually gave itself that power. Of course, it doesn't have the power to rule in favor of blatantly un-Constitutional law, as it has done many times throughout history, either. That ship sailed long ago, but now it appears the Constitution and the whole rule of law is sinking.]

Where we once celebrated Independence Day - our nation's emancipation from the boot of monolithic and tyrannical government - we must now admit that a government of exponentially worse size and scope has forced the citizens of this nation (with or without their consent) back into a mindset of dependence. America's real producers - the middle class - work more than 4 months out of every year just to pay off government debts. And to think, our country's founders revolted over taxes in the single digits!

You can exercise your right to bear arms, but only with government permission. You can practice freedom of speech, but only in free speech zones. You are told you have rights, but you can be spied on without warrants, have your person invaded at airports, and even be arrested and indefinitely detained (or worse) without due process. You and your family are even forced to pay the crushing debts of others, including private banks and corporations. Government seems to have successfully conned We the People into believing that it gives us our rights, and it can take them away. That's wrong.

We're no longer the land of the free. But we can be again. The spirit of Liberty can be forgotten for a time, but it never dies.

Restoring our freedom starts with admitting our failures. Many have claimed the Constitution while endorsing policies perpendicular to it. Most have explicitly and implicitly endorsed grand exceptions to the rule of law, paving the way for its demise in the wake of rule by men. We have alternately and repeatedly asked politicians from one or another political party to "fix" things. After many decades, both parties have failed. And still, the failures are explained away as faults of "the other side."

Great men of our nation's past, such as George Washington, warned against a two-party political system, and the innumerable reasons why are staring us in the face. With national debt and deficit spending at an unsustainable all-time high, and respect and honor of the principles that made America great at a dangerous all-time low, our great nation is at the crossroads. This deteriorating cycle must be broken, and it has never been more apparent that the only solution is to be unrelenting in our pursuit of justice and intellectual honesty, and unforgiving in our casting out of all those who have violated their oath to uphold the Constitution, even once, without exception.

But if you vote for the same old politicians (like Our Congressman) again this November, you'll just be asking for more of the same.